Crossposted from Revs board, and I see discussion on Chicago board and Chivas expansion board. Posting here since the mention of current MLS teams moving. Mods - feel free to merge if needed. Again, take it for what it is worth....but this should get some interesting reactions: "MLS is still unable to answer specific questions that surround the league at this time, such as expansion and relocation - the latter becoming a large issue with the potential move for one of the current teams to another city. San Jose, New England and Kansas City have all been linked with possible relocations over the last 12 months." http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headli...=299372&cc=5901
"News" story This article was taken from UssoccerUK. The Chivas USA in Chicago part is based on the thread already here on Bigsoccer. As the previous poster said, take it for what it is worth.
Re: "News" story The rumor certainly percolated here, but Chris Bergin was the one who called up Peter Wilt and got him to speak about it.
This is the first I've heard of New England as a possible relocation canidate. Is there any sign Kraft wants out because if so, then it's counter productive just trading in one I/O for another. MLS wouldn't be gaining any which is what they need. Also, when I clicked on the link, it said page not found. Did you enter it wrong?
it's the VERY same article from Chris Bergin at ussocceruk.com you can find it there. There is no talk of MLS teams moving (Kansas and NE). SJ might be a different story unless Club America buys the team OR the attendance/stadium situation improve.
There were some rumors a few years back that the Krafts may have been re-evaluating their investment in MLS, but I've not heard anything recently to suggest as such, even though the Revolution continue to work at cutting operating costs. I think they appreciate that the risks associated with running a MLS franchise are less than if they withdraw from the league entirely, and potential isolate themselves from future international friendlies, U.S. National Team matches, etc. The Magpie
There was a very inaccurate article written that surmised that Mr. Hunt might move his team to Rochester. The assumption was connected to a visit Mr. Hunt's paid to the area and his comments that Rochester was a great soccer town. There are no facts supporting the story. And no quotes from Mr. Hunt or anyone else in the Wizards organization. It would be very unlikely that Mr. Hunt would move his KC team since he owns the football team here also. And he gets the use of Arrowhead for the Wizards for about $1 a year. He has a long and good history with KC and has never indicated any interest in moving his teams from the area.
And the fact that Hunt's trip to Rochester was explicitly to help MLS evaluate Rochester as an expansion market, including evaluation of Rochester's current ownership as potential MLS owners. The trip was not to see if he could try to move one of his teams to Rochester and squash the Rhinos.
I would bet Lamar builds a SSS in the KC area before he moves the Wizards. NE I could see being moved, not because it's not a great soccer market - it is - but because the Krafts commitment to soccer is a little shaky. San Jose - we'll let that one play out without comment from me. As to the Chivas/Chicago thing, Wilt's quotes were interesting in that he said he was for it. I see that as early spin. In otherwords, he sees it's going to happen and he wants to paint a picture in public of this being good for the Fire and good for soccer. I think his comments are rather telling.
I've heard of the Krafts being rumored as wanting out. Whether that necessarily means moving the Revs, I don't know. I would think KC would be highly unlikely, but, then, I thought Anschutz would never sell the Rapids.
I had the same feeling about this. Either he's being really, really candid, or this is him being a good politician. Let's face it: If Chivas are really looking to play in the Bridgeview stadium, Peter Wilt is highly involved in the discussions. He either knows that they will play there, or knows that they won't. Unless Vergara himself doesn't yet know.
There was a recent article in the Rochester paper that put 1 and 1 together and got five. The writer's premise was that Lamar Hunt once visited Rochester and said nice things about it, and that the "journalist" also believed the Wizards attendance was crap and that since Hunt had built a stadium for the Crew, and was building one for the Burn, that the only logical conclusion was that Hunt was going to move the Wizards to Rochester.
Not only am I against Chivas USA moving to Chicago, I'm even more against them sharing a stadium with the Fire. That's just crap. I know the Jets and Giants share a stadium (though the Jets are tryign to build their own). And I'm pretty sure the Lakers and Clippers share the Staples Center. But still. the Cubs and White Sox don't share. Yankees and Mets. I just don't like it one bit. Besides. If Chivas USA is supposed to draw the entire hispanic population of Chicago, won't Bridgeview be too small? I'd think they'd need a place as big as Soldier Field. CUSA were going to play in Qualcomm in San Diego and they said they'd fill it.
I say we just let Chivas play all away games - or, give them like eight home fields: Chivas Chicago/Los Angeles/San Diego/Houston/San Antonio/Miami/Little Rock/Phoenix/Las Vegas/Fresno/Walla Walla.
Its pretty clear that Chivas will field a team in Chicago, AEG will move the eQuakes to Seattle, and Club America will set up operations in San Jose.
Whew. That's a relief. I can stop paying attention now and just fast forward to later in the year when they announce all that.
Good. Most of my mis-informed assesment was based on the fact that Chivas Chicago has a nice ring to it. Very scientific. This Chivas stuff is really dragging on and on.
They would seem highly unlikely since their respective I/Os control the revenue streams at their stadiums.